Not having read the transcript, I don't know how the experts introduced themselves or wanted to be addressed or were addressed by counsel. I suspect that Judge Jones was just following the testimony on this one. In my experience judges always referred to the witnesses as they requested to be referred to. Also, I don't think there is much difference between the two in the mind of most folk. Some professors prefer "Professor" because it is more exclusive set, but some prefer "Dr." because they think it sounds more prestigious and separates them from the non-doctor professors. At Howard University, in most departments Dr. is the typical appellation. Not in the law school though, though we all have J.Ds. So yes, IMO you are reading too much into it. On Dec 21, 2005, at 2:10 PM, Steve Monsma wrote:
-- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/ "I do not at all resent criticism, even when, for the sake of emphasis, it for a time parts company with reality." Winston Churchill, speech to the House of Commons, 1941 |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.